Impact of Nulliparous Women's Body Mass Index or Excessive Weight Gain in Pregnancy on Genital Tract Trauma at Birth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to explore the impact of body mass index (BMI) or pregnancy weight gain on the presence, site, and severity of genital tract trauma at childbirth in nulliparous women. METHODS: The present study is a subanalysis of a prospective cohort of healthy nulliparous women recruited during pregnancy and followed through birth. Weight gain during pregnancy and prepregnancy BMI were recorded. At birth, women underwent detailed mapping of genital tract trauma. For analyses, women were dichotomized into obese (BMI ≥ 30) versus nonobese (BMI < 30) at baseline as well as into those who gained weight as recommended by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) and those who gained more than the recommended amount to determine the impact of obesity or excessive weight gain on rates of genital tract trauma. RESULTS: Data from 445 women were available for analysis. Presence and severity of genital tract trauma did not vary between obese and nonobese women (51% vs 53%, P = .64). Likewise, women who had more than the IOM-recommended weight gain did not have a higher incidence of perineal lacerations (52% versus 53% with perineal lacerations, P = .69). Obese women were more likely to gain in excess of the IOM guidelines during pregnancy (75% vs 50% excessive weight gain in obese vs nonobese women, respectively; P < .001). DISCUSSION: A woman's BMI or excessive weight gain in pregnancy did not influence her risk of genital tract trauma at birth.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".